About your Search

20130422
20130422
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
. i hope the obama administration will allow us that option that exists in our law. they have a very bad track record here. >> reporter: fox news is told investigators are probing a potential link to a islamist group as first reported on fox over the weekend. they were responsible for the attack on moscow airport. in response the group issued a statement saying their disagreement is with russia. they did not deny knowing the brothers. also according to one source who has reviewed that, they were undercut in their claims trying to deny any connection because they pointed the finger as russia as being responsible for these bombings which of course there is no evidence to support that, jon. jon: catherine herridge, lots of tangled leads to unravel here. catherine, thank you. >> reporter: you're welcome. jenna: for more on this now we'll bring in our next guest, chris voss, retired fbi special agent and hostage negotiator and manager of insight security. we talked you to last few times in. great to have you back on the program. >> thank you, jenna. jenna: catherine is reporting on there
discussion that the blind sheik, whose picture is up on the screen now, might be freed by the obama administration, that president morsi in egypt that seemed to infuriate you some what and you wrote an article, "will obama free the blind sheik?" now if you think about this, in this case, if the death penalty is not sought, are you concerned that some president down the road could ignore the issue of a life sentence imposed by a federal judge and just send the terrorist off somewhere? >> on this guy, tsarnaev? >> right. >> no, i'm not concerned about that. he's very different from the sheik. concerned about that. a sheikh is a highly symbolic figure among muslims. he was and still is widely respected as a muslim scholar, and regarded as an authority. he's a big deal. this guy is a mutt. >> so you're not worried about that? >> no. >> finally the death penalty, if he is charged with those crimes that he clearly can be, he's eligible for the death penalty? >> absolutely. >> do you think that this >> do you think this just disat the present time -- justice department will seek it? >> i h
that the blind sheik whose picture is up on the screen now is -- might be freed by the obama administration and that the president morrisey in egypt wanted him back. and that seemed to infuriate you some what and you wrote an article will obama free the blind sheik. now, if you think about this, in this case if the death penalty is not sought are you concerned that some president down the road could just ignore the issue of a life sentence imposed by a federal judge and just send the terrorists off somewhere? >> on this guy. tsarnaev? >> judge jeanine: right. >> i'm not concerned about that. the sheik is a highly symbolic figure among muslims. he was and still is widely respected as a muslim scholar. and regarded as an authority. he is a big deal. this guy is a mutt. >> judge jeanine: so you are not worried about that? >> no. >> judge jeanine: and finally the death penalty if he is charged with the crimes that he clearly can be he is eligible for the death penalty. >> absolutely. >> judge jeanine: do you think that this justice department will seek it? >> i sure hope so. he is a poster chil
precisely defined. the obama administration said 48 hours, but that's simply their interpretation. now, this hole miranda issue though i think we can overstate its importance. all miranda does is restrict whether those statements can be used against tsarnaev himself in a court case. they can still use all this other evidence that they have against him. so they may simply decide we're not going to use these statements at all. we're going to prove our case with other evidence. >> true, jeff. >> but then it doesn't matter. >> i'm curious about the voluntary statements. if he offers something up, can't that also be used as opposed to bringing it out in interrogation? >> yes, although it would be difficult to say that an intubated sedated person suddenly decided to write out answers to questions. i think it's quite clear he's being questioned here. the real issue is does the government want to use those answers in court or do they simply want to use it to continue their investigation, which they certainly have every right to do. >> but there's one other issue that relates -- >> go ahead, pr
as opposed to within the criminal justice system, which seems to be what the obama administration will do. after all, he is a u.s. citizen. he carried out the crime on u.s. soil. and there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of legal basis to try him as enemy combatant, which is not to say there aren't going to be more calls particularly from the right to do just that. >> when in theory you have so much evidence on american soil, why tarnish the prosecution by going enemy combatant. if you have no backlash from anybody who says you didn't do it the right way. >> he stole a suspect. but clearly -- you've got to walk through the process, right? >> i was thinking this weekend, again, and i'm speculating, you read the articles. we know now he ran after his own brother. you know what the defense is going to be. i was brainwashed by my brother. i ran over him to get away. >> the older brother, basically was even asked to leave his own mosque because his anti-american views were so strong that the islamic community in cambridge was outraged. >> if they saw this happen, raise this question and raise h
the advisory he was taught by the wars outside the war zone. early on the obama administration. and he said in contrast to the wars in iraq and afghanistan where the united states has used a hammer, he said we, the obama administration, can use a scalpel. it was an idea i had that scalpel certainly applied a sos free. surgery without obligations. but we see that's not the case in a lot of places. so i thought i would take his analogy and make it a nice because nice fights are a lot messier. >> host: steve, california, you're on with mark mazzetti from "the new york times." >> caller: this. the united states has not declared war in over 70 years. the wars we thought, korea, vietnam, iraq, afghanistan have all been basically unconstitutional. we seem to have given up any a semblance of pretending to declare war, congress seems to have no stomach to declaring war but obviously no problem fighting them. i'm wondering whether or not you think that the militarization of the cia, potential conflict between the different agencies and the defense department might in fact said whether that we return
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)